Monday, May 25, 2015

When I
wrote last week’s column after
seeing garbage piled up on the pavement along East Hastings Street, I expected
a good number of responses. But I was still astonished by what many of you had
to say.

Some
online comments were included in Friday’s Courier, including a note from Joji
Kumagai of the Strathcona BIA clarifying that the Hastings Crossing BIA is
responsible for daytime cleaning of this portion of East Hastings Street, not
his organization.

Sarah P.
was more critical: “Michael Geller, your pearl clutching is embarrassing. And
if you’re this hard up for column ideas, you might consider just not submitting
something, rather than turning in this kind of ideological dreck.”

I did
hear from Wes Regan, executive director of the Hastings Crossing BIA. He
initially was of the view shared by many others; namely that my concern for
weeds and garbage outweighed any concern I might have for the people on the
street.

I
subsequently spoke with him. He questioned how a BIA with the smallest budget
in the city could reasonably be expected to keep the 100-block of East Hastings
Street tidy, noting their entire budget could be blown through in a couple of
months.

He
referred me to the city’s street cleaning and sanitation departments since he
has often asked for more garbage cans but they never seem to arrive. I promised
to mention this with the hope that my column might result in more garbage cans
along the street.

He also
pointed out that it is important to distinguish between the regular sidewalk
street vending along 100-block and the Pigeon Park Street Market, which is
relocating to a new site on Powell Street, adding: “If we want to see cleaner,
nicer, safer looking streets, we should eliminate poverty and work with street
vendors.”

While I
hope we do not have to end poverty before we can have cleaner streets, I do
acknowledge another of Regan’s concerns, also indirectly expressed in Jordon
Shaw’s Facebook comment:

“This
isn’t clutter, this is their living room. How would you like it if someone took
a picture of your living room?”

Low-income
neighbourhood residents have steadily lost indoor spaces to socialize in over
the past 15 years. The 24-hour diners have disappeared and mom and pop
restaurants are being priced out of the neighbourhood. As a result, a lot more
people are looking for places to hang out.

However,
last week’s column and the accompanying photograph were not about the street
vendors or people standing around on the street. My concern was the garbage
being allowed to pile up on the road. While
many defended the mess since the people are poor, a local resident named
Deirdre shared my view of the situation. Poverty has nothing to do with being
dirty; it’s stereotypical to believe they go together.

Last
week’s column also elicited concerns about other parts of the city. Jacqueline
wrote: “Our streets downtown are dirty as well! Have you ever looked around the
Bay and seen and smelt the urine? Granville Street is awful!”

While I
heard similar concerns about other neighbourhoods, I received encouraging words
from the City of Vancouver. It seems
Vancouver does have an adopt-a-block program as part of the Keep Vancouver
Spectacular (KVS) initiative and 76 blocks are being looked after.

The
program is in its 20th year, with 18,739 participants, and as part of this
year’s kickoff and Tourism Vancouver’s annual cleanup, volunteers do cover part
of the Downtown Eastside. In
addition, the Chinatown BIA is doing a cleanup on May 24 and the Carnegie
Centre organizes cleanups throughout the year. There is also one volunteer that
who lives in the neighbourhood who cleans up each Sunday after the Pigeon Park
Market.

So there
you have it. Yes, the 100-block East Hastings Street is a serious problem that
needs attention, but the city-wide situation is not as grim as I may have
portrayed.

Now, if
we could get more garbage cans and additional funding for street cleaning along
Hastings Street, hopefully I won’t have to write on this topic next year.

Wednesday, May 13, 2015

I grew up
in a modest three-bedroom post-war bungalow in North Toronto in the 1960’s.
Many of my classmates lived in similar homes, although some were quite reticent
about sharing this fact. That is
because they did not live in the house. They lived in an illegal basement suite
and constantly worried their family might one day be evicted.

Years
later, after joining CMHC in the Architecture and Planning Division, my
colleagues and I often discussed how basement suites could be better designed
and legalized, noting they were an effective way of providing affordable
housing.

It is
therefore with considerable pleasure that over the past decade, I have watched
municipalities across Canada legalizing basement suites. In
Vancouver, the City Council has relaxed a number of building code regulations
to make the approval of basement suites easier. The city now allows a reduced
ceiling height and relaxed sprinkler system requirements. Other municipalities from
Abbotsford to West Vancouver have also revised regulations to permit legal
basement suites.

Vancouver
now permits suites in every detached single-family home in Vancouver within the
RS, RM and RT zones, noting they are an excellent way to reduce our carbon
footprint and expand affordable housing choices. While I
applaud Vancouver and other Metro municipalities for these changes, I would
urge them to go a few steps further.

Firstly,
I would like them to permit more basement suites in new duplex and townhouse
developments. While
lower-level suites are sometimes permitted in heritage conservation projects,
especially around Kitsilano, I see no reason why they should not be allowed in
most new duplex and townhouse projects as long as fire-safety provisions are
taken into account, along with parking requirements.

In some
cases, where housing is not close to transit, additional off-street parking
should be required. However, where there is good transit and car-sharing
programs available, parking standards should be relaxed.

While
some might wonder how you can have basement suites in townhouses, I would
invite you to think about the many terraced housing developments you have
walked by in London where lower level suites, often accessed directly from the
street, are quite common. These
were once the servants’ quarters. However, today, they provide well located and
oftentimes surprisingly high-priced accommodation.

Basement
or “lock-off” suites are starting to be permitted in some new Vancouver
townhouse developments such as those along Oak Street. These suites generally
have their own separate entrance from the street, and a second locked entrance
from within the unit. The resulting design is very flexible.

Similar
units can also found in Toronto, Calgary and at SFU’s UniverCity where some
apartments even feature secondary lock-off suites. A newspaper journalist once
referred to them as “mortgage helpers in the sky.”

To date,
most basement suites are rental only. However, in some instances it would be
both desirable and feasible for new suites to be offered for sale. Examples
of basement suites for sale can be found in new developments in Kitsilano and
other Vancouver neighbourhoods. While
some might question why anyone would purchase a basement suite, these are not sold
as basement suites; they are sold as “garden-level” suites.

In most
cases, they feature large windows and a walk-0ut to a private outdoor space,
making them a very attractive and more affordable housing option. Fire and
sound separation can be achieved in the same way as in conventional apartment
buildings. These
units are a far cry from the damp basements many of us have experienced in
older single-family houses.

At a time
when we are seeking more affordable forms of housing, I can envision basement suites
contributing to the “gentle densification” of existing single-family
properties. By combining a new duplex with garden suites on each side and a
laneway house, it would be possible to replace a single house on a 50-foot lot
with five new dwellings; some for sale, some for rent, or all for sale.

The
overall density and site coverage need not be significantly greater than what
is currently permitted. Moreover, the result would be smaller, more affordable
homes appealing to both first-time and move-up buyers, as well as empty-nesters
ready to downsize.

- See
more at:
http://www.rew.ca/news/opinion-basement-suites-in-duplexes-and-townhouses-and-for-sale-1.1931404#sthash.YpSrJIcC.dpuf

I
grew up in a modest three-bedroom post-war bungalow in North Toronto in
the 1960’s. Many of my classmates lived in similar homes, although some
were quite reticent about sharing this fact.
That is because they did not live in the house. They lived in an
illegal basement suite and constantly worried their family might one day
be evicted.
Years later, after joining CMHC in the Architecture and Planning
Division, my colleagues and I often discussed how basement suites could
be better designed and legalized, noting they were an effective way of
providing affordable housing.
It is therefore with considerable pleasure that over the past decade, I
have watched municipalities across Canada legalizing basement suites.
In Vancouver, the City Council has relaxed a number of building code
regulations to make the approval of basement suites easier. The city now
allows a reduced ceiling height and relaxed sprinkler system
requirements. Other municipalities from Abbotsford to West Vancouver
have also revised regulations to permit legal basement suites.
Vancouver now permits suites in every detached single-family home in
Vancouver within the RS, RM and RT zones, noting they are an excellent
way to reduce our carbon footprint and expand affordable housing
choices.
While I applaud Vancouver and other Metro municipalities for these changes, I would urge them to go a few steps further.
Firstly, I would like them to permit more basement suites in new duplex and townhouse developments.
While lower-level suites are sometimes permitted in heritage
conservation projects, especially around Kitsilano, I see no reason why
they should not be allowed in most new duplex and townhouse projects as
long as fire-safety provisions are taken into account, along with
parking requirements.
In some cases, where housing is not close to transit, additional
off-street parking should be required. However, where there is good
transit and car-sharing programs available, parking standards should be
relaxed.
While some might wonder how you can have basement suites in townhouses,
I would invite you to think about the many terraced housing
developments you have walked by in London where lower level suites,
often accessed directly from the street, are quite common.
These were once the servants’ quarters. However, today, they provide
well located and oftentimes surprisingly high-priced accommodation.
Basement or “lock-off” suites are starting to be permitted in some new
Vancouver townhouse developments such as those along Oak Street. These
suites generally have their own separate entrance from the street, and a
second locked entrance from within the unit. The resulting design is
very flexible.
Similar units can also found in Toronto, Calgary and at SFU’s
UniverCity where some apartments even feature secondary lock-off suites.
A newspaper journalist once referred to them as “mortgage helpers in
the sky.”
To date, most basement suites are rental only. However, in some
instances it would be both desirable and feasible for new suites to be
offered for sale.
Examples of basement suites for sale can be found in new developments in Kitsilano and other Vancouver neighbourhoods.
While some might question why anyone would purchase a basement suite,
these are not sold as basement suites; they are sold as “garden-level”
suites.
In most cases, they feature large windows and a walk-0ut to a private
outdoor space, making them a very attractive and more affordable housing
option. Fire and sound separation can be achieved in the same way as in
conventional apartment buildings.
These units are a far cry from the damp basements many of us have experienced in older single-family houses.
At a time when we are seeking more affordable forms of housing, I can
envision basement suites contributing to the “gentle densification” of
existing single-family properties. By combining a new duplex with garden
suites on each side and a laneway house, it would be possible to
replace a single house on a 50-foot lot with five new dwellings; some
for sale, some for rent, or all for sale.
The overall density and site coverage need not be significantly greater
than what is currently permitted. Moreover, the result would be
smaller, more affordable homes appealing to both first-time and move-up
buyers, as well as empty-nesters ready to downsize.
- See more at:
http://www.rew.ca/news/opinion-basement-suites-in-duplexes-and-townhouses-and-for-sale-1.1931404#sthash.YpSrJIcC.dpuf

I
grew up in a modest three-bedroom post-war bungalow in North Toronto in
the 1960’s. Many of my classmates lived in similar homes, although some
were quite reticent about sharing this fact.
That is because they did not live in the house. They lived in an
illegal basement suite and constantly worried their family might one day
be evicted.
Years later, after joining CMHC in the Architecture and Planning
Division, my colleagues and I often discussed how basement suites could
be better designed and legalized, noting they were an effective way of
providing affordable housing.
It is therefore with considerable pleasure that over the past decade, I
have watched municipalities across Canada legalizing basement suites.
In Vancouver, the City Council has relaxed a number of building code
regulations to make the approval of basement suites easier. The city now
allows a reduced ceiling height and relaxed sprinkler system
requirements. Other municipalities from Abbotsford to West Vancouver
have also revised regulations to permit legal basement suites.
Vancouver now permits suites in every detached single-family home in
Vancouver within the RS, RM and RT zones, noting they are an excellent
way to reduce our carbon footprint and expand affordable housing
choices.
While I applaud Vancouver and other Metro municipalities for these changes, I would urge them to go a few steps further.
Firstly, I would like them to permit more basement suites in new duplex and townhouse developments.
While lower-level suites are sometimes permitted in heritage
conservation projects, especially around Kitsilano, I see no reason why
they should not be allowed in most new duplex and townhouse projects as
long as fire-safety provisions are taken into account, along with
parking requirements.
In some cases, where housing is not close to transit, additional
off-street parking should be required. However, where there is good
transit and car-sharing programs available, parking standards should be
relaxed.
While some might wonder how you can have basement suites in townhouses,
I would invite you to think about the many terraced housing
developments you have walked by in London where lower level suites,
often accessed directly from the street, are quite common.
These were once the servants’ quarters. However, today, they provide
well located and oftentimes surprisingly high-priced accommodation.
Basement or “lock-off” suites are starting to be permitted in some new
Vancouver townhouse developments such as those along Oak Street. These
suites generally have their own separate entrance from the street, and a
second locked entrance from within the unit. The resulting design is
very flexible.
Similar units can also found in Toronto, Calgary and at SFU’s
UniverCity where some apartments even feature secondary lock-off suites.
A newspaper journalist once referred to them as “mortgage helpers in
the sky.”
To date, most basement suites are rental only. However, in some
instances it would be both desirable and feasible for new suites to be
offered for sale.
Examples of basement suites for sale can be found in new developments in Kitsilano and other Vancouver neighbourhoods.
While some might question why anyone would purchase a basement suite,
these are not sold as basement suites; they are sold as “garden-level”
suites.
In most cases, they feature large windows and a walk-0ut to a private
outdoor space, making them a very attractive and more affordable housing
option. Fire and sound separation can be achieved in the same way as in
conventional apartment buildings.
These units are a far cry from the damp basements many of us have experienced in older single-family houses.
At a time when we are seeking more affordable forms of housing, I can
envision basement suites contributing to the “gentle densification” of
existing single-family properties. By combining a new duplex with garden
suites on each side and a laneway house, it would be possible to
replace a single house on a 50-foot lot with five new dwellings; some
for sale, some for rent, or all for sale.
The overall density and site coverage need not be significantly greater
than what is currently permitted. Moreover, the result would be
smaller, more affordable homes appealing to both first-time and move-up
buyers, as well as empty-nesters ready to downsize.
- See more at:
http://www.rew.ca/news/opinion-basement-suites-in-duplexes-and-townhouses-and-for-sale-1.1931404#sthash.YpSrJIcC.dpuf

I was born in England where the
terraced row house is one of the most generic forms of housing. There
are row houses, or townhouses, throughout Metro Vancouver but there is a
significant difference between UK row houses and what you find here.

In Vancouver, unless they are rental,
row houses are generally owned as part of a larger development. They are
strata-titled, and purchasers are members of a condominium association.
While they own their unit outright, the exterior walls, landscaping,
parking and driveways are generally owned in common.

In UK, the row houses are usually
“fee-simple” ownership. In other words, they are owned outright, just
like a single-family house, with a party wall agreement in place.

There are a few reasons why we have
not seen more fee-simple row house developments in and around Vancouver.
Firstly, they can cost more than a conventional row housing complex.
Instead of one sewer and water hook-up for the entire development, there
may be individual connections to every unit. I say there “may be” since it is legally possible to reduce the number of connections with cross-easement agreements.

There may also additional costs associated with the party wall construction. For many years, the Vancouver Law
Department questioned whether the legal agreements covering the party
walls between individual units were binding in perpetuity.An early fee-simple development on
Cambie Street at West 33 Avenue, undertaken by the late planner and
politician Art Cowie, a longstanding proponent of fee-simple row houses,
had to have two walls separated by an air space.A few years ago, the province changed
legislation so that the city lawyers could sleep at night and not have
to worry about this legal complexity. However, changes often come slowly
in the development community.Forty years ago, a number of fee-simple row house developments were built in Burnaby and Coquitlam, which are still around.

More recently, Parklane Homes built
a fee-simple row house development in Langley as part of Bedford
Landing. A party wall agreement is in place and a services easement
agreement allows water supply and sewer pipes to cross over different
properties.

To prevent someone from painting their row house bright yellow, design guidelines are registered on title.Aragon Homes,
another innovative development company, built a fee-simple row house
development as part of its Port Royal development in Queensborough, New
Westminster.

As noted, there are pros and cons of a fee-simple row house compared to a condominium unit.The first pro is there are no common
area assessments. You are not paying someone to cut the grass or
maintain your home. You pay the maintenance costs as if you were living
in a single-family house.

Another advantage is that you decide
when to undertake maintenance or carry out major repairs. Unfortunately,
as evidenced by the depreciation reports that condominiums now have to
prepare, many strata councils put off necessary repairs in order to keep
monthly fees low.

There is also a sense of independence
that may be lost in a condominium. Fee-simple owners can paint their
front door red if they want without having to seek approval from the
strata council. They can also landscape their patio or garden as they
see fit. This is generally not possible in a condominium development.

The cons are the other side of the same coin. Firstly, there is no strata council to
arrange for maintenance or repairs. You have to do it yourself, and the
costs could be higher. You may not have the same degree of
control over your immediate neighbours. Unless there are design
guidelines in place, if your next-door neighbour decides to paint their
house black with orange accents, there may not be anything you can do. Similarly, if they decide to dig up their bit of grass and replace it with a play area for their kids, you will have little say.

However, as more and more baby-boomers
chose to move out of single-family houses, I expect there will be an
increased demand for individually owned fee-simple row houses.
Furthermore, many young couples who cannot afford a house but are
prepared to undertake their own maintenance may prefer this housing form
and tenure.I therefore expect forward-looking
developers and homebuilders to build more of this type of housing,
especially if municipalities increase the amount of land zoned for
townhouses.

Driving
along the 100 Block East Hastings last Tuesday, I was so disgusted with what I
saw I had to park my car and take a photo. Outside a
graffiti covered, boarded up storefront, a pile of garbage was strewn along the
curb lane of the road.

Just as I
was taking the photo, a man yelling and swearing came towards me, threatening
to break my camera. Somewhat frightened, I ran back to my car and drove away
without looking back.

Why did I
take the picture? Why should I care what the street looks like?

I took
the photo to post on Twitter and Facebook so others could see what is happening
to a part of our beautiful city.

After
tweeting the photo to the City of Vancouver I was promised someone would follow
up. The next day I received a telephone call from a very polite person in
sanitation. He advised that since city crews found it too dangerous to clean up
that portion of Hasting Street during the daytime, the city had contracted with
the Strathcona BIA who in turn was hiring local people to carry out the work.

I was
shocked to be told there is now an area in our city which the sanitation
department deems too dangerous to keep clean during the daytime.

I decided
to seek a comment from city councillors Geoff Meggs and Andrea Reimer via
Twitter. Neither replied, which surprised me since in the past, Coun. Reimer
has often responded to my tweets. I also
requested a comment from the Strathcona BIA. No response.

I realize
many will question whether this is really something I should get too worked up
about. After all, given the rising cost of housing, gang violence in Surrey,
and Vancouver kids going to school hungry, is it really that important to worry
about our city’s cleanliness?

I think
it is, since a city’s cleanliness says
something about its sense of pride. Furthermore, it is an aspect of urban life
that we can easily do something about.

By
international standards, Vancouver is a relatively clean city. We particularly
excel in the management of unwanted graffiti that is plaguing so many cities
around the world. However, I think we are failing when it comes to smaller
things like controlling weeds and litter, chewing gum, and cigarette butts, and
streetscapes in the Downtown Eastside.

We also
need to do a better job of weeding along streets and once-prized public
walkways. Just take a look at the False Creek walkway at the foot of Howe
Street, or the now barren, but recently weed-covered median at the south end of
the Burrard Bridge.

We might
take a lead from Galway, Ireland which imposes fines for those throwing chewing
gum on the sidewalk and dissuades people from throwing cigarette butts on the
ground since they not only make a mess, they are bad for the environment. They
are not biodegradable; they harm marine and animal life.

Other
world cities have come up with creative solutions to deal with uncleanliness.
In Dublin, the city administration placed provocative posters on buses and
around town proclaiming: “If you behave like a piece of filth, that’s how the
world sees you. Litter is disgusting. So are those responsible. Elsewhere
throughout the country, towns and cities compete to win a “Tidy Town” award.
Participating shopkeepers carry out litter patrol duties at the end of each day
as they close up their businesses.

In
Singapore, public housing residents compete annually to maintain the cleanest
project. The cost of prize monies is more than offset by savings in
maintenance, not to mention enhanced civic pride.

Over the
next month, I would like to see businesses and residents throughout our city,
and especially the Downtown Eastside, embark on a community “Spring Cleaning.” To
maintain neighbourhood cleanliness over the longer term, we might set up an
Adopt a Block program, similar to Seattle and other American cities.

As the
“broken windows theory” has demonstrated, maintaining the physical environment
helps to create an atmosphere of order and lawfulness, thereby preventing more
serious crimes from happening. A good
spring cleaning throughout our city might be a good way to get started.

- See
more at: http://www.vancourier.com/opinion/vancouver-needs-a-good-spring-cleaning-1.1931039#sthash.OSwYp583.dpuf